I have now served 24 years on the Finance Committee, and the last 20 years has been a continued frustration in our disinclination and refusal to make the research and development credit permanent. It is elemental that research projects go beyond 2, 4, or 20 years. It is elemental and in the interest of society that these projects should take place. We allow the credit to be taken but only in 2-year intervals, as it were, such that there will obviously be some decisions made that it is too risky and maybe they won't do it next time. We always renew it, but at a cost. There is an efficiency cost which is clear. I, for one, will happily vote in support of the Senator's proposal.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for a permanent research and development credit during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Patrick Moynihan
just 2 days ago, the Washington Times carried a fine article by our former colleague, Rudy Boschwitz, and Robert Paarlberg, who is a professor of political science at Wellesley College, entitled ``China Trade Boosts Farmers,'' subtitled…
Sir, I would like to speak to the matter that the Senator from West Virginia has addressed from the perspective of the Finance Committee. I think the Senator will agree that most of the budget of the Federal Government goes through the…
my great thanks to the chairman of the Finance Committee for his efforts in bringing this legislation, the Tariff Suspension and Trade Act of 2000, to a successful conclusion. Last November, the World Trade Organization Seattle Ministerial…
If the present report is to serve any large purpose, it is to introduce the public to the thought that secrecy is a mode of regulation. In truth, it is the ultimate mode for the citizen does not even know that he or she is being regulated.





